Michael Moore and the big 3

Gatecrasher3

Senior member
Oct 15, 2004
417
0
76
Thats what I'am saying,
innovation is what's going to save North America, not bailouts.
The big 3 have been dragging their asses for years and now they are behind the 8 ball.


"Saving the Big 3 for You and Me ...a message from Michael Moore

Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008

Friends,

I drive an American car. It's a Chrysler. That's not an endorsement. It's more like a cry for pity. And now for a decades-old story, retold ad infinitum by tens of millions of Americans, a third of whom have had to desert their country to simply find a damn way to get to work in something that won't break down:

My Chrysler is four years old. I bought it because of its smooth and comfortable ride. Daimler-Benz owned the company then and had the good grace to place the Chrysler chassis on a Mercedes axle and, man, was that a sweet ride!

When it would start.

More than a dozen times in these years, the car has simply died. Batteries have been replaced, but that wasn't the problem. My dad drives the same model. His car has died many times, too. Just won't start, for no reason at all.

A few weeks ago, I took my Chrysler in to the Chrysler dealer here in northern Michigan -- and the latest fixes cost me $1,400. The next day, the vehicle wouldn't start. When I got it going, the brake warning light came on. And on and on.

You might assume from this that I couldn't give a rat's ass about these miserably inept crapmobile makers down the road in Detroit city. But I do care. I care about the millions whose lives and livelihoods depend on these car companies. I care about the security and defense of this country because the world is running out of oil -- and when it runs out, the calamity and collapse that will take place will make the current recession/depression look like a Tommy Tune musical.

And I care about what happens with the Big 3 because they are more responsible than almost anyone for the destruction of our fragile atmosphere and the daily melting of our polar ice caps.

Congress must save the industrial infrastructure that these companies control and the jobs they create. And it must save the world from the internal combustion engine. This great, vast manufacturing network can redeem itself by building mass transit and electric/hybrid cars, and the kind of transportation we need for the 21st century.

And Congress must do all this by NOT giving GM, Ford and Chrysler the $34 billion they are asking for in "loans" (a few days ago they only wanted $25 billion; that's how stupid they are -- they don't even know how much they really need to make this month's payroll. If you or I tried to get a loan from the bank this way, not only would we be thrown out on our ear, the bank would place us on some sort of credit rating blacklist).

Two weeks ago, the CEOs of the Big 3 were tarred and feathered before a Congressional committee who sneered at them in a way far different than when the heads of the financial industry showed up two months earlier. At that time, the politicians tripped over each other in their swoon for Wall Street and its Ponzi schemers who had concocted Byzantine ways to bet other people's money on unregulated credit default swaps, known in the common vernacular as unicorns and fairies.

But the Detroit boys were from the Midwest, the Rust (yuk!) Belt, where they made real things that consumers needed and could touch and buy, and that continually recycled money into the economy (shocking!), produced unions that created the middle class, and fixed my teeth for free when I was ten.

For all of that, the auto heads had to sit there in November and be ridiculed about how they traveled to D.C. Yes, they flew on their corporate jets, just like the bankers and Wall Street thieves did in October. But, hey, THAT was OK! They're the Masters of the Universe! Nothing but the best chariots for Big Finance as they set about to loot our nation's treasury.

Of course, the auto magnates used be the Masters who ruled the world. They were the pulsating hub that all other industries -- steel, oil, cement contractors -- served. Fifty-five years ago, the president of GM sat on that same Capitol Hill and bluntly told Congress, what's good for General Motors is good for the country. Because, you see, in their minds, GM WAS the country.

What a long, sad fall from grace we witnessed on November 19th when the three blind mice had their knuckles slapped and then were sent back home to write an essay called, "Why You Should Give Me Billions of Dollars of Free Cash." They were also asked if they would work for a dollar a year. Take that! What a big, brave Congress they are! Requesting indentured servitude from (still) three of the most powerful men in the world. This from a spineless body that won't dare stand up to a disgraced president nor turn down a single funding request for a war that neither they nor the American public support. Amazing.

Let me just state the obvious: Every single dollar Congress gives these three companies will be flushed right down the toilet. There is nothing the management teams of the Big 3 are going to do to convince people to go out during a recession and buy their big, gas-guzzling, inferior products. Just forget it. And, as sure as I am that the Ford family-owned Detroit Lions are not going to the Super Bowl -- ever -- I can guarantee you, after they burn through this $34 billion, they'll be back for another $34 billion next summer.

So what to do? Members of Congress, here's what I propose:

1. Transporting Americans is and should be one of the most important functions our government must address. And because we are facing a massive economic, energy and environmental crisis, the new president and Congress must do what Franklin Roosevelt did when he was faced with a crisis (and ordered the auto industry to stop building cars and instead build tanks and planes): The Big 3 are, from this point forward, to build only cars that are not primarily dependent on oil and, more importantly to build trains, buses, subways and light rail (a corresponding public works project across the country will build the rail lines and tracks). This will not only save jobs, but create millions of new ones.

2. You could buy ALL the common shares of stock in General Motors for less than $3 billion. Why should we give GM $18 billion or $25 billion or anything? Take the money and buy the company! (You're going to demand collateral anyway if you give them the "loan," and because we know they will default on that loan, you're going to own the company in the end as it is. So why wait? Just buy them out now.)

3. None of us want government officials running a car company, but there are some very smart transportation geniuses who could be hired to do this. We need a Marshall Plan to switch us off oil-dependent vehicles and get us into the 21st century.

This proposal is not radical or rocket science. It just takes one of the smartest people ever to run for the presidency to pull it off. What I'm proposing has worked before. The national rail system was in shambles in the '70s. The government took it over. A decade later it was turning a profit, so the government returned it to private/public hands, and got a couple billion dollars put back in the treasury.

This proposal will save our industrial infrastructure -- and millions of jobs. More importantly, it will create millions more. It literally could pull us out of this recession.

In contrast, yesterday General Motors presented its restructuring proposal to Congress. They promised, if Congress gave them $18 billion now, they would, in turn, eliminate around 20,000 jobs. You read that right. We give them billions so they can throw more Americans out of work. That's been their Big Idea for the last 30 years -- layoff thousands in order to protect profits. But no one ever stopped to ask this question: If you throw everyone out of work, who's going to have the money to go out and buy a car?

These idiots don't deserve a dime. Fire all of them, and take over the industry for the good of the workers, the country and the planet.

What's good for General Motors IS good for the country. Once the country is calling the shots.

Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com "
 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,113
925
126
MM is such a tosser. :roll:

tosser
n 1: terms of abuse for a masturbator [syn: jerk-off, wanker]
2: someone who throws lightly (as with the palm upward)


And where is the link to your cut n paste?
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,001
113
106
I heard it said a lot these days that these loans/bailouts/rescues/etc. are socialist policies. What MM proposes here IS Socialism, with a capital "S", as it is direct government ownership of the means of production (in this case, of vehicles). That isn't to say that it is a better/worse option than what is currently being considered. I do agree with him in that we need a much bigger gvt mandate to move the automotive industry away from solely ICE powerplants, and that the car industry cannot do well if people do not make the necessary wages to actually buy said cars. Remember Henry Ford and his $5/day when Ford first was going? That was so his workers could afford to buy his vehicles in addition to production incentives... I'm not so sure we have a comparable situation in todays labor market...and if we still do, it is rapidly stagnating/diminishing.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
While I don't care for MM, I thought that was kinda humerous.

But I do agree with him about (1) loaning a company $25 billion when their market cap is only $3B seems crazy and (2) their promises to cut a lot of jobs if Congress gives them the money. The latter strikes me as quite crazy too given the big reason to bail them out is to save jobs.

GM's annual payroll is about $8B, Congress could just use the $25B to pay these people for 3 years.

Fern
 

Saga

Banned
Feb 18, 2005
2,718
1
0
Honestly I think it boils down to a lot more issues, fundamentally.

The fact that a just a few years ago I can remember driving to work and seeing the majority of cars carrying 2+ people, however now I drive to work fighting congested traffic and idiot drivers and I'd be damned to spot a total of two cars on a 45 minute commute that have more than just one person in them.

THAT is probably a bigger issue.
 

Squisher

Lifer
Aug 17, 2000
21,207
66
91
Yeah, the big 3 should build things people don't want, "to build only cars that are not primarily dependent on oil and, more importantly to build trains, buses, subways and light rail". Then I guess the government could take people's cars away and force them to use other forms of transportation.

Bailout or no bailout, Micheal Moore is surly losing his mind.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,084
1,505
126
I agree with him and think this is a good idea. People bash socialism, but the free market is failing so perhaps a little socialism is what we need.
 

Deliximus

Senior member
Aug 11, 2001
318
0
76
total laissez-faire free market never worked. The British abandoned it during the 1st half of the 20th century after watching the rich get richer and poor get poorer, pollution getting worse in the major cities, large companies dont' give two shits about the environment, and it's all about profits. It's a mix of some of the ideals of socialism that makes things work.

I agree with many of Moore's points in the past but the bailout needs to be very careful and need to seriously control the behavior of these 3 and hold them accountable (SERIOUS accountability, not slaps on the hand).
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,062
1
0
Originally posted by: thraashman
I agree with him and think this is a good idea. People bash socialism, but the free market is failing so perhaps a little socialism is what we need.

perhaps, but what we don't need is more stupid, which in this case is what MM is offering.
 

biostud

Lifer
Feb 27, 2003
18,407
4,968
136
The government (the representatives of the people, those you have chosen to lead your country) could use billions of $ to improve America instead of just handing them out as tax refunds, military expenses or crisis loans. They could say: We have $25 billions we want to use to improve the transport system or energy sector, to overcome the future problems we are facing. That would be climate changes and lower supply of oil. The companies best suited for these tasks would then apply for the job and get contracts worth $25 billions. They would then create lots of new jobs while helping to modernize America.
You may think that is socialism, but the work is still done by private companies, while it's the government (reps. of the people of America) who hire private companies.
The military (government) have huge contracts with private companies, why couldn't they have huge contracts in the transport and energy sector? Why is the military so special?
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Good plan, this is what I have been saying also, nationalize them and use their infrastructure to build the people infrastructure as in public transit and non ICE vehicles.
Would be wonderful irony for the companies who blatently dismatntled our public transit in the 50s illegally.
 

crownjules

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2005
4,858
0
76
Originally posted by: Squisher
Yeah, the big 3 should build things people don't want,.

Yeah, the Big 3 should just keep building things that are putting them out of business...
 

biostud

Lifer
Feb 27, 2003
18,407
4,968
136
Originally posted by: crownjules
Originally posted by: Squisher
Yeah, the big 3 should build things people don't want,.

Yeah, the Big 3 should just keep building things that are putting them out of business...

And if that wasn't the fall of the Sovjet union.........
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed
Good plan, this is what I have been saying also, nationalize them and use their infrastructure to build the people infrastructure as in public transit and non ICE vehicles.
Would be wonderful irony for the companies who blatently dismatntled our public transit in the 50s illegally.

Get those evil car manufacturers for ruining our mass tranist systems 50 years ago by having them rebuild it!

btw nationalizing an industry that is not a national priority is a waste of time. It will fail worse than it does now and all we will be left with is a giant tax bill while Toyota, Honda, and VW eat up our domestic market laughing all the way to the bank.

 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: Fern
While I don't care for MM, I thought that was kinda humerous.

But I do agree with him about (1) loaning a company $25 billion when their market cap is only $3B seems crazy and (2) their promises to cut a lot of jobs if Congress gives them the money. The latter strikes me as quite crazy too given the big reason to bail them out is to save jobs.

GM's annual payroll is about $8B, Congress could just use the $25B to pay these people for 3 years.

Fern

Multiply that by about 10 and you get a more accurate payroll. Dealers, supplier, marketers, magazines, commodities like US steel, small businesses etc would all have massive layoffs or shutdown entirely due to Big 3 failure. Not saying they should get bailed out but failing would put us into a depression for sure. Probably much needed though to get back to sustainable basics like saving, paying attention to what pols actually do, and living within our means.

I think they should get a least one shot though because presendent was set with financial industry and back in the 70's with Chrysler not to mention foreign govts 'loan' money all the time to their multinationals.
 

Squisher

Lifer
Aug 17, 2000
21,207
66
91
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: Fern
While I don't care for MM, I thought that was kinda humerous.

But I do agree with him about (1) loaning a company $25 billion when their market cap is only $3B seems crazy and (2) their promises to cut a lot of jobs if Congress gives them the money. The latter strikes me as quite crazy too given the big reason to bail them out is to save jobs.

GM's annual payroll is about $8B, Congress could just use the $25B to pay these people for 3 years.

Fern

Multiply that by about 10 and you get a more accurate payroll. Dealers, supplier, marketers, magazines, commodities like US steel, small businesses etc would all have massive layoffs or shutdown entirely due to Big 3 failure. Not saying they should get bailed out but failing would put us into a depression for sure. Probably much needed though to get back to sustainable basics like saving, paying attention to what pols actually do, and living within our means.

I think they should get a least one shot though because presendent was set with financial industry and back in the 70's with Chrysler not to mention foreign govts 'loan' money all the time to their multinationals.


You might as well include having to pay for the retirements of all the qualified employees and unemployment benefits for the 3 million out of work.

The guy from Moody's who is also testifying before the congressional committee today said if they don't give the automakers up to $125 billion over the next 3 years the cost to the federal and state governments would dwarf that amount.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,130
5,658
126
He makes a lot of sense. It could work, however, how do you do this and deal with Imports at the same time without skewing things in favour of the Big 3? I suppose the Public Transportation aspect of the idea takes care of a lot of that problem, but Public Transportation can only be a Market for a period of time before those Companies would need to return to the Auto Market.

As for "Socialism": Well, the only way to avoid a "Socialist" type solution is to let the Big 3 inevitably Fail. I think most would agree that their failure would be a very bad thing at this time.
 

wirelessenabled

Platinum Member
Feb 5, 2001
2,190
41
91
Originally posted by: MovingTarget
I heard it said a lot these days that these loans/bailouts/rescues/etc. are socialist policies. What MM proposes here IS Socialism, with a capital "S", as it is direct government ownership of the means of production (in this case, of vehicles). That isn't to say that it is a better/worse option than what is currently being considered. I do agree with him in that we need a much bigger gvt mandate to move the automotive industry away from solely ICE powerplants, and that the car industry cannot do well if people do not make the necessary wages to actually buy said cars. Remember Henry Ford and his $5/day when Ford first was going? That was so his workers could afford to buy his vehicles in addition to production incentives... I'm not so sure we have a comparable situation in todays labor market...and if we still do, it is rapidly stagnating/diminishing.

Of course don't worry about the $200+ billion Paulson has spent buying shares in 3000 banks. That wouldn't be socialism with a Capital S would it?

Or the Gov buying 79.9% of AIG for, what $150 billion now. Must not be "direct government ownership" somehow or Socialism.

What is MM saying that hasn't already happened in other sectors?
 

wnied

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
4,206
0
76
Yeah, the Big 3 should just keep building things that are putting them out of business...

Actually they should be recruiting the sharpest minds in the design business to help design and implement a line of vehicles that will sell well into the future and run on alternative fuels.

If that puts them out of business, so be it. But it IS what we/they need.
~wnied~
 

SigArms08

Member
Apr 16, 2008
181
0
0
Originally posted by: wnied
Yeah, the Big 3 should just keep building things that are putting them out of business...

Actually they should be recruiting the sharpest minds in the design business to help design and implement a line of vehicles that will sell well into the future and run on alternative fuels.

If that puts them out of business, so be it. But it IS what we/they need.
~wnied~

I believe they already have some of the sharpest minds in the automotive design business. This issue is the result of poor management and politics internal to these companies.

 

TallBill

Lifer
Apr 29, 2001
46,044
62
91
Originally posted by: Muse
I do not hate Michael Moore.

I stopped believing him after watching Bowling for Columbine and then reading pages and pages of sourced and legit information completely debunking many scenes in the movie.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |